Case law

  • Case Details
    • National ID: 12/2014
    • Member State: Malta
    • Common Name:Mercieca noe vs Camilleri noe
    • Decision type: Administrative decision in appeal
    • Decision date: 29/07/2015
    • Court: Court of Appeal (Civil, inferior)
    • Subject:
    • Plaintiff: Manuel Mercieca noe
    • Defendant: Piu Camileri noe
    • Keywords: consumer, immovable property, trader
  • Directive Articles
    Consumer Rights Directive, Chapter 1, Article 2, (1) Consumer Rights Directive, Chapter 1, Article 2, (2) Consumer Rights Directive, Chapter 1, Article 3, 3., (f)
  • Headnote
    (1) Consumer legislation applies when one party is a consumer and the other a trader; Directive 2011/83 (implemented into Maltese law by the Consumer Rights Regulations) expressly excludes contracts of sale of property from the remit of the law.
  • Facts
    Plaintiff represented the owners of apartments. The case was instituted to claim damages in relation to a damaged lift in the common parts of the apartment building. Defendant represented the company which had carried out works in the apartments buildings; the company had also sold the apartments to the various owners. Owners of the apartments were given a right of use of the lift in the contract of sale of the apartment. However, because of works still being carried out by defendant, the lift could not be used. It was also claimed that the lift was damaged when water entered the lift pit.
    The Consumer Claims Tribunal found for plaintiff. Defendant appealed, arguing that the Tribunal had failed to take into account the preliminary plea regarding its competence. Defendant also pleaded that there was never a contract of sale of the lift, and that in any event Article 79 of the Consumer Affairs Act (which implements Article 5.2 of Directive 1999/44 into Maltese law) required that the seller be informed of a defect within two months.
  • Legal issue
    The court found that the case did not fall within the competence of the Consumer Claims Tribunal and that the claim should have been brought in the civil courts.
  • Decision

    (1) What is the scope of consumer legislation?


    Full text: Full text

  • Related Cases

    No results available

  • Legal Literature

    No results available

  • Result
    Appeal was upheld and the decision revoked.